Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Vincent Terry v. Teresa Bailey, et al.
IFP petition · Court of Appeals of Georgia, No. A24A1189 · judgment March 13, 2025
Questions presented
This case raises key issues about the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause and the scope of attorney immunity doctrines. This Court has recognized that due process requires procedures adequate to ensure meaningful appellate review where constitutional rights are implicated; however, unexplained summary affirmances provide no indication that federal claims were considered or adjudicated. This Court has also held that immunity doctrines are functional and do not extend to intentional or criminal misconduct, particularly where private actors act jointly or where conduct interferes with federally protected rights. THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED ARE:
-
Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is violated when a state appellate court resolves federal constitutional claims through an unexplained summary affirmance, effectively foreclosing meaningful federal review and allowing the lower court’s reasoning to escape any scrutiny.
-
Whether a state court violates federal constitutional limits by applying attorney immunity doctrines to bar civil liability for alleged fraudulent or criminal conduct by attorneys, including coordinated conduct by multiple attorneys, when that conduct is alleged to have interfered with property rights and judicial proceedings protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Vincent Terry
For respondent
—
Proceedings
- Jun 18 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2026.
- May 27 2026Petitioner complied with order of April 6, 2026.
- May 20 2026Application (25A1114) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until June 26, 2026.
- May 14 2026Application (25A1114) to extend further the time to an extension of time within which to comply from May 27, 2026 to June 26, 2026, submitted to Justice Thomas.
- Apr 09 2026Application (25A1114) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until May 27, 2026.
- Apr 06 2026The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until April 27, 2026, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
- Apr 06 2026Application (25A1114) for an extension of time within which to comply with the order of an extension of time within which to comply, submitted to Justice Thomas.
- Mar 18 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/2/2026.
- Nov 25 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 2, 2026)
- Oct 22 2025Application (25A284) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until November 28, 2025.
- Oct 20 2025Application (25A284) to extend further the time from October 29, 2025 to November 28, 2025, submitted to Justice Thomas.
- Sep 11 2025Application (25A284) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until October 29, 2025.
- Sep 08 2025Application (25A284) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 29, 2025 to October 29, 2025, submitted to Justice Thomas.